Difference between revisions of "Roaming Discussion: 1916"

From Critical Practice Chelsea
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 8: Line 8:
  
 
*This "informal critique" was not structured like the classic "the artist doesn't talk" variety. (As, for instance, in [[Show Not Tell Seminar Series]].)
 
*This "informal critique" was not structured like the classic "the artist doesn't talk" variety. (As, for instance, in [[Show Not Tell Seminar Series]].)
*Recurrent theme - what it means to focus on one's "subject" - for example, Kristen's concern with co-habitation - should she or shouldn't she move in with her boyfriend? That's the focus. The references to surrealism and holidays confused this focus - They may well have been a focus in their own right - they just weren't the artist's main focus in this artwork; nor were they working in the service of her focus...
+
*Recurrent theme - what it means to focus on one's "subject" (the subject of an artwork) - for example, Kristen's concern with co-habitation - should she or shouldn't she move in with her boyfriend? That's the focus. The references to surrealism and holidays confused this focus - They may well have be a focus in their own right (which was my initial reading of the work) - they just weren't the artist's main focus in this piece; nor were they working in the service of her focus...
 
*Lots of discussion around the frame of the gallery and the power of that frame - there's a tendency to:  
 
*Lots of discussion around the frame of the gallery and the power of that frame - there's a tendency to:  
 
#Make stuff that looks like art - for example, how the bathroom paintings were hung - they went from being in a shelf (in a real bathroom) to being in a gallery  
 
#Make stuff that looks like art - for example, how the bathroom paintings were hung - they went from being in a shelf (in a real bathroom) to being in a gallery  
 
#To indulge in creative installation - the artist forgets to become installer - or the installer plays at being an artist - the result: the hang is aestheticized in non-essential ways.  
 
#To indulge in creative installation - the artist forgets to become installer - or the installer plays at being an artist - the result: the hang is aestheticized in non-essential ways.  
#To insufficiently consider the power of the gallery - Maria's painting should have either been bigger or smaller - as it was, its domestic scale wasn't working...
+
#To insufficiently consider the power of the gallery - Maria's painting should have been bigger or smaller - as it was, its domestic scale wasn't working in the weird space that is the Triangle Gallery.  
*Scott's seesaw is provocative - fun and absurd...For Scott: interested in the balance of power. But as Neil observed, this seesaw was weighted in the middle - the balance issue wasn't literalized in the artwork. And yet, I know that I, for one, felt self-conscious my own body when riding the seesaw - I looked for people who where about my size to ride with...
+
*Scott's seesaw is provocative - fun and absurd...The artist is interested in the balance of power and engaging with the seesaw enacts this idea. But as Neil observed, this one was weighted in the middle - the balance issue wasn't literalized in the artwork. And yet, I know that I, for one, felt self-conscious about my own body when riding the seesaw - I looked for people who where about my size to ride with...
 
*Conversing while riding this seesaw...(playful) physical activity allowed/encouraged a different kind of engagement. Embodied approach...
 
*Conversing while riding this seesaw...(playful) physical activity allowed/encouraged a different kind of engagement. Embodied approach...
  

Revision as of 14:44, 20 March 2010

Roaming Discussion of 1916 with Neil Cummings
March 18, 2010 - Triangle Space, Chelsea College of Art and Design
In attendance: Neil Cummings, Kristen Lovelock, Scott Schwager, Maria Chritaforatou and Me

  • This "informal critique" was not structured like the classic "the artist doesn't talk" variety. (As, for instance, in Show Not Tell Seminar Series.)
  • Recurrent theme - what it means to focus on one's "subject" (the subject of an artwork) - for example, Kristen's concern with co-habitation - should she or shouldn't she move in with her boyfriend? That's the focus. The references to surrealism and holidays confused this focus - They may well have be a focus in their own right (which was my initial reading of the work) - they just weren't the artist's main focus in this piece; nor were they working in the service of her focus...
  • Lots of discussion around the frame of the gallery and the power of that frame - there's a tendency to:
  1. Make stuff that looks like art - for example, how the bathroom paintings were hung - they went from being in a shelf (in a real bathroom) to being in a gallery
  2. To indulge in creative installation - the artist forgets to become installer - or the installer plays at being an artist - the result: the hang is aestheticized in non-essential ways.
  3. To insufficiently consider the power of the gallery - Maria's painting should have been bigger or smaller - as it was, its domestic scale wasn't working in the weird space that is the Triangle Gallery.
  • Scott's seesaw is provocative - fun and absurd...The artist is interested in the balance of power and engaging with the seesaw enacts this idea. But as Neil observed, this one was weighted in the middle - the balance issue wasn't literalized in the artwork. And yet, I know that I, for one, felt self-conscious about my own body when riding the seesaw - I looked for people who where about my size to ride with...
  • Conversing while riding this seesaw...(playful) physical activity allowed/encouraged a different kind of engagement. Embodied approach...

Return to Walks
Return to Marsha Bradfield's Research Hub
Visit Marsha's bio page

Return to artists, researchers, academics and others
Return to Main Page

Kristen Lovelock Should I Move in with Him.jpg

Kristen Lovelock - part of Should I move in with him